Performance management in action: a configurational analysis of the drivers of the purposeful use of performance information

• Date: 01 July 2024
• Pages: 277-295
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/IJPSM-01-2024-0021
• Published date: 01 July 2024
• Subject Matter: Public policy & environmental management,Politics,Public adminstration & management
• Author: Francesco Vidè,Denita Cepiku,Marco Mastrodascio

Performance management in

action: a configurational analysis

of the drivers of the purposeful use

of performance information

Francesco Vid

e

SDA Bocconi School of Management, Milano, Italy

Denita Cepiku

Department of Management and Law, University of Rome Tor Vergata,

Rome, Italy, and

Marco Mastrodascio

Department of Law, Economics, Politics and Modern Languages, LUMSA,

Roma, Italy

Abstract

Purpose –The article explores which configurations of organizational and individual conditions support the

purposeful use of performance information in the public sector. Prior research has predominantly focused on

the effects of individual factors without paying as much attention to how these factors interact to influence

public managers’attitudes to integrating performance information into their decision-making.

Design/methodology/approach–The study employs a fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis (fs-QCA)

to examine the different combinations of organizational and individual drivers that facilitate purposeful

performance information use.

Findings –Goal clarity is a necessary but insufficient condition for purposeful information use. It needs to be

complemented by a mature performance management system, public managers with prosocial motivation who

engage in extra-role behaviours within a non-innovative organizational culture, or a developmental culture that

motivates managers who are unaware of the social impact generated by their work.

Research limitations/implications –The case selection does not allow for direct generalizations. Future

studies could replicate the configurational analysis in different countries and sectors and introduce additional

environmental, organizational, and individual conditions.

Practical implications –The study suggests the need to integrate actions that support the purposeful use of

performance information and define clear departmental goals. Although the latter is a necessary condition, it

needs to be supported by other organizational and individual factors.

Originality/value –The study deepens the theory of the drivers of purposeful performance information use

in the public sector by adopting a configurational approach and exploring how organizational and individual

conditions interact to foster information use.

Keywords Performance management, Performance information use, Qualitative comparative analysis,

Goal clarity, Prosocial motivation, Developmental culture

Paper type Research paper

Introduction

Performance management practices have become pervasive in numerous countries and

across different levels of government (Bouckaert and Halligan, 2008), demonstrating a

International

Journal of Public

Sector

Management

277

© Francesco Vid

e, Denita Cepiku and Marco Mastrodascio. Published by Emerald Publishing Limited.

This article is published under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) licence. Anyone may

reproduce, distribute, translate and create derivative works of this article (for both commercial and non-

commercial purposes), subject to full attribution to the original publication and authors. The full terms of

this licence may be seen at http://creativecommons.org/licences/by/4.0/legalcode

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:

https://www.emerald.com/insight/0951-3558.htm

Received 25 January 2024

Revised 28 April 2024

30 May 2024

Accepted 3 June 2024

International Journal of Public

Sector Management

Vol. 38 No. 2, 2025

pp. 277-295

Emerald Publishing Limited

0951-3558

DOI 10.1108/IJPSM-01-2024-0021

positive correlation with public performance (Verbeeten, 2008). However, the simple

collection and integration of data into management systems are insufficient to ensure the

success of performance-oriented reforms (Van Dooren et al., 2015;Melo and Mota, 2020).

Performance management systems can effectively support better results and greater

accountability only if performance information is actually used by public decision-makers

(Moynihan, 2023;Zahra and Bouckaert, 2021). More specifically, “if we want to study the

successes and failures of performance movements, we have to study the use of performance

information”(Van Dooren, 2008, p. 22), which refers to the methodical collection of

information, highlighting the results and impacts of public services (Pollitt, 2006).

Public managers leverage performance information for various purposes. However, their

objectives may not consistently prioritize the improvement of public services (Moynihan,

2009). For instance, public managers may use performance information passively to fulfil

formal requirements (Moynihan et al., 2012a), manipulate data to hide lower-than-expected

results (Choi and Woo, 2022), or leverage performance information for external legitimation

and resource advocacy (Nitzl et al., 2019). In contrast to these uses, public managers can opt to

fully harness the managerial potential of the information generated by performance

management systems. This involves purposefully using performance information to make

informed decisions related to changes in service or program design, resource allocations,

organizational learning, and personnel management, as well as decisions regarding reward

and sanctioning systems, all aimed at improving public performance (Moynihan, 2009).

The academic literature extensively investigates the potential determinants of the

purposeful use of performance information in public administrations,categorizing them into

individual, organizational, and environmental factors (Kroll, 2015). At the individual level,

public managers are more likely to use performance information when they are motivated by

performance goals and the desire to generate social value (Kroll and Vogel, 2014). Beyond

individual factors, organizations can facilitate the use of performance information by

providing managers with a mature performance management system (Ammons and

Rivenbark, 2008), and cultivating a performance-oriented work environment (Rajala and

Sinervo, 2021). Furthermore, the external environment can impede managerial information

use if stakeholders and politicians fail to endorse performance measures (Ho, 2006).

This study contributes to understanding the determinants of purposeful performance

information use by employing a configurational approach. While previous studies have

analysed correlations between each factor and the use of performance information (e.g.

Taylor, 2011), this paper analyses how different conditions can interact to support public

managers in using performance information for informed decisions. Analysing the interplay

of multiple factors has been suggested as a crucial research strategy for the study of

performance information use (Kroll, 2015) and, more generally, for social phenomena (Merton,

1968). The following research question is therefore addressed: what different combinations of

organizational and individual conditions facilitate the purposeful use of performance

information among public managers?

The next section provides the theoretical background, and the third section explores the

case selection, data collection and methodology, including the operationalization of outcomes

and causal conditions. The fourth section presents the empirical results, while the final

sections discuss the main findings and draw conclusions, emphasizing the limitations of the

study and the primary contribution to public management scholarship and practice.

Theoretical background

Use of performance information

Performance management in public-sector organizations involves a multi-step cycle that goes

beyond the design and implementation of technically sound performance measurement

IJPSM

38,2

278